Oregon & Washington to the B1G - Clemson & Florida State Next?

[funhusker]

4 hours ago, Notre Dame Joe said:

A playoff tells you which team is best equipped to win an elimination tournament.  Pollsters can take into account all factors when deciding which team had the best season. 

Are you nervous about Norte Dame getting lost without a real conference, or what?

 

The only argument for polls is the fun drama it creates for fans.  And it’s not fair to the players.

 

Every level of football is based on standings and playoffs; from Pop Warner through Div2, the NFL, the XFL, the AFL, the arena leagues, etc.  Div1 college football (outside of some rec leagues) is the only meaningful system not decided by playoffs.  Is EVERYONE else doing it wrong?  

[runningblind]

6 hours ago, Notre Dame Joe said:

A playoff tells you which team is best equipped to win an elimination tournament.  Pollsters can take into account all factors when deciding which team had the best season. 

I'm not sure why you would ever want a sport settled by people behind a keyboard or in a conference room. You should always want it settled on the field, then there can be no (legitimate) arguments about who won that year.

[Notre Dame Joe]

9 hours ago, funhusker said:

Are you nervous about Norte Dame getting lost without a real conference, or what?

 

The only argument for polls is the fun drama it creates for fans.  And it’s not fair to the players.

 

Every level of football is based on standings and playoffs; from Pop Warner through Div2, the NFL, the XFL, the AFL, the arena leagues, etc.  Div1 college football (outside of some rec leagues) is the only meaningful system not decided by playoffs.  Is EVERYONE else doing it wrong?  

Here we go again.

 

Every other level of football tells players which team they will play for.  Should college football adopt geographic restrictions or a draft make the playoff equitable?

7 hours ago, runningblind said:

I'm not sure why you would ever want a sport settled by people behind a keyboard or in a conference room. You should always want it settled on the field, then there can be no (legitimate) arguments about who won that year.

But not really on the field.  In this NFL model and early season loss on the field is moot for a team that gets good at the end of the season.  

[runningblind]

2 hours ago, Notre Dame Joe said:

Here we go again.

 

But not really on the field.  In this NFL model and early season loss on the field is moot for a team that gets good at the end of the season.  

It's ALL on the field with a playoff.  Over the course of a season,  teams improve, or get worse, in sports. An early loss shouldn't disqualify you in a fair sport.  When you have a sport where the criteria to crown a champion can change from year to year, (D1 college football is the only example), that becomes unfair. A playoff makes this closer to equitable than the antiquated model you're still fighting for.  It's not perfect, I personally think we need a limit on the number of 4/5 star players that can go to one school, but it's better than some old farts making eye ball decisions in a hotel conference room.  We need set entrance criteria, and to abolish the committee.  It's pretty ridiculous to me anyone still wants that,  if they care about finding a true champion.

[funhusker]

2 hours ago, Notre Dame Joe said:

Here we go again.

 

Every other level of football tells players which team they will play for.  Should college football adopt geographic restrictions or a draft make the playoff equitable?

But not really on the field.  In this NFL model and early season loss on the field is moot for a team that gets good at the end of the season.  

As far as I know, Div 2 and lower athletes pick their schools.  NFL free agents pick where they sign.  Kids and parents pick what club they play for.  Hell, kids are even starting to pick high schools.

 

You can have your opinion.  It’s just a silly one.

[BigRedBuster]

Polls were always the dumbest way to crown a champion. 

[Mavric]

19 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

Polls were always the dumbest way to crown a champion. 

 

Polls aren't great but the real issue was the inability (most of the time) to match up the best teams in the post-season.

[Archy1221]

14 hours ago, funhusker said:

 

Every level of football is based on standings and playoffs; from Pop Warner through Div2, the NFL, the XFL, the AFL, the arena leagues, etc.  Div1 college football (outside of some rec leagues) is the only meaningful system not decided by playoffs.  Is EVERYONE else doing it wrong?  

Doesn’t D1 currently have a four team playoff and expanding soon?  
 

 

[Savage Husker]

Arguably, poll system is the best way to motivate dominance from start to finish. And it typically pitted the two best teams against each other when B1G or PAC10 wasn’t involved. Will be interesting to see how things change

 

Not arguing polls vs playoff, but a poll system emphasizes the need to be great from start to finish. Outside of split natties because of Rose Bowl, not many people argue who the national champion should have been. It’s typically only about who got left out (and why they deserved to lose to the eventual champion).

 

I hope something happens (in)organically to the sport which would create more parity because by the end of the season there are maybe 2-3 teams who have a legit shot at beating the “best team on paper.” Maybe expanding the playoff and consolidating the conferences does it. 

[funhusker]

8 hours ago, Archy1221 said:

Doesn’t D1 currently have a four team playoff and expanding soon?  
 

 

Archy, instead of finding things to bicker about.  Try reading the whole conversation.

 

And yes.  They do.  And I, @runningblind, and many others think it's a good start.

[Archy1221]

54 minutes ago, funhusker said:

Archy, instead of finding things to bicker about.  Try reading the whole conversation.

 

And yes.  They do.  And I, @runningblind, and many others think it's a good start.

I did read the convo and it had some good points.  I wasn’t bickering, just pointing out D1 had a playoff currently that was expanding in size.  Once the playoff gets to 20 teams, it will be proportional  in size to the number of teams DII takes.  

[funhusker]

1 hour ago, Archy1221 said:

I did read the convo and it had some good points.  I wasn’t bickering, just pointing out D1 had a playoff currently that was expanding in size.  Once the playoff gets to 20 teams, it will be proportional  in size to the number of teams DII takes.  

So you were actually asking if the Div 1 Championship was decided by a playoff?  Sounds like you already knew the answer.

 

So thanks for adding some enlightening thoughts to this.  It's greatly appreciated, I guess...  

[Archy1221]

50 minutes ago, funhusker said:

So you were actually asking if the Div 1 Championship was decided by a playoff?  Sounds like you already knew the answer.

 

So thanks for adding some enlightening thoughts to this.  It's greatly appreciated, I guess...  

no worries!  
 

One other thing to note if people want D1 to be more like DII in determining a champion, conference championships do matter in DII when considering what teams make the playoffs.   There are no automatic bids. 
so Independents and the SEC and now the BIG would probably appreciate  a system more like DII. 

[nic]

17 hours ago, BigRedBuster said:

Polls were always the dumbest way to crown a champion. 

Especially in 1997. 

[Notre Dame Joe]

On 8/20/2023 at 8:45 PM, Savage Husker said:

Arguably, poll system is the best way to motivate dominance from start to finish. And it typically pitted the two best teams against each other when B1G or PAC10 wasn’t involved. Will be interesting to see how things change

 

Not arguing polls vs playoff, but a poll system emphasizes the need to be great from start to finish. Outside of split natties because of Rose Bowl, not many people argue who the national champion should have been. It’s typically only about who got left out (and why they deserved to lose to the eventual champion).

 

I hope something happens (in)organically to the sport which would create more parity because by the end of the season there are maybe 2-3 teams who have a legit shot at beating the “best team on paper.” Maybe expanding the playoff and consolidating the conferences does it. 

Either the first part of the season is more important or less.  You can't have both.